THE EDITOR, Sir:
I have always been fascinated by how it is that the subject of homosexuality can turn otherwise rational people into incoherent fearmongers.
It would seem that Peter Espeut has literally reached the end of his wits, as evidenced by his article published on Friday, February 15 and titled 'Gay rights aren't human rights'.
The article must be rejected for the affront to humanity that it is. It is not for Christian fundamentalists to determine who is human and, therefore, who is deserving of the rights afforded to human beings. Given our history of slavery and colonialism, I would think it to be self-evident that humanity is a matter of fact, not dogma.
It has always been popular for those in opposition to a more comprehensive concept of human rights to demonise, or at least minimise, the identities of those for whom they have contempt. In this respect, Espeut was true to form.
Central to his thesis were the questions: "Is it not the LGBT lobby that is being totalitarian here? By trying to get laws passed which impose LGBT beliefs on us all, whether we subscribe to them or not? Isn't LGBT tyranny about seeking to legitimise their lifestyles by imposing their own brand of morality?"
A succinct response to all three (though really two) questions is NO.
What is totalitarian about agitating for changes to laws which privilege a Judaeo-Christian value system above all others? What is tyrannical about challenging the systemic denial of the legitimacy of LGBT identity? Why is the acceptance of sexual and gender diversity so offensive to your value system when they are really facts of life, and not faith?
As the world begins to correct some of the injustices meted out to sexual minorities, the fundamentalist movement is becoming more and more hysterical as they realise that their grip on the collective conscience is slipping.
This leads to a whole lot of noise, with very little substance. Rather than dwelling on absurdities such as men marrying their donkeys and lamenting on the need to protect the "sustainable human institution" of heterosexual marriage, it would serve Espeut and others to simply admit that they just don't like gay people.
Stop this masquerade that you love the sinner but hate the sin. At least that would be a more intellectually honest position.